And I have to add my voice to the chorus of those questioning your endowment figures. I work in higher ed - in fundraising, as a matter of fact - and seeing those endowment numbers, which in each case represent that university's TOTAL endowment (not just its law school's endowment), makes me squeamish. I understand how hard those numbers are to come by, but I think it would improve your analysis.

I also think that including information on annual fundraising and state support might help flesh this out. You mentioned that you knew you were omitting state support, but support from alumni, friends, and foundations also plays a big role in this.

I completely agree. This is not the only area in which better data would make a huge difference in our ability to appraise law schools. If you have any sources or suggestions for getting more specific figures, then I would be happy to hear them. Based on what publicly available data I have found, this is, as stated, offered as the least worst rough guess for which schools have the potential to succeed and prosper over time. And total endowment figures are far from the worst estimate of gross fund raising power for a school. At the very least, it's a clear measure of a school's success in doing exactly what you refer to above -- getting and growing money from alumni and other sources of support.

Also, I don't think a single voice counts as a chorus. But I guess two might.

It's the case brochure for Penn Law's current campaign. I'm guessing Penn had to contact the other schools to find these data; The Chronicle of Higher Education, for example, only has university-wide information. If you dig around on law school websites, you might be able to find passing references to their endowments, especially on their development/advancement/alumni relations sites.

I'm facing a similar decision between GW and Temple ($$$$), and I'm also leaning toward Temple right now. Personally, I don't think it's worth $96K more debt (or even half that number) to go to OSU, unless - and this is a huge "unless" - you want to practice in Ohio.

Also, FWIW, Temple is a great school if you're interested in public interest law.

Gross endowment is a better measure of a school's ability to take on major capital projects

Good example of both this and the relevance of system endowments is the Penn State - Dickinson merger. Clearly the main selling point for that whole idea was that Dickinson would gain access to the massive PSU endowment. This is in fact funding major capital improvements for the school, including overhauling the Carlisle campus and building the new University Park facilities. So these schools at least seemed to think that access to major capital funding and affiliation with university resources are important for success. For the moment US News seems to agree with them. But it's hard to tell how long or how far they will continue to rise.

Endowment funds are not typically used to renovate old buildings or build new ones, but I agree that DLS clearly benefits from Penn State's financial weight. Just don't call it endowment.

And I have to add my voice to the chorus of those questioning your endowment figures. I work in higher ed - in fundraising, as a matter of fact - and seeing those endowment numbers, which in each case represent that university's TOTAL endowment (not just its law school's endowment), makes me squeamish. I understand how hard those numbers are to come by, but I think it would improve your analysis.

I also think that including information on annual fundraising and state support might help flesh this out. You mentioned that you knew you were omitting state support, but support from alumni, friends, and foundations also plays a big role in this.

Any advice would be appreciated...down to Temple and Rutgers-Newark. They seem pretty similar in reputation, atmosphere and course offerings to me, and I hope to work in Philly, with the option of maybe NJ or NYC as well.

So which is it? Deciding where you want to practice will tell you where to go. And though it kind of sucks, you need to try and give SO-related concerns as little weight as possible in making your choice.

I know I've grossly oversimplified your situation, but I hope that helps.

In my defense, I understand it ("...could care less") doesn't make sense and is the opposite of what I meant, which is why I thanked Chris Rock for correcting me. I think it's just a common mistake people make in spoken conversation.

I agree with the comments so far. You're not talking about a minor difference in quality of education here; it's a HUGE difference. And the difference of $10K/year is really not much at all. I understand your family-related concerns, but the opportunities you'll have coming out of UT will be much better (and more lucrative), no matter what type of law you're interested in. Good luck with your decision!